Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We considered the Soviet Union to be a rogue state. We negotiated with them with (mostly) good results. Again, what was it you were saying?
Actually, we crushed their economy. They tried so hard to compete with us that they imploded. We needn't have fired a shot.
Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won t Last - Bloomberg View
A group of 47 Republican senators has written an open letter to Iran's leaders warning them that any nuclear deal they sign with President Barack Obama's administration won’t last after Obama leaves office.Organized by freshman Senator Tom Cotton and signed by the chamber's entire party leadership as well as potential 2016 presidential contenders Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, the letter is meant not just to discourage the Iranian regime from signing a deal but also to pressure the White House into giving Congress some authority over the process.
“It has come to our attention while observing your nuclear negotiations with our government that you may not fully understand our constitutional system … Anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement,” the senators wrote. “The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.”
Arms-control advocates and supporters of the negotiations argue that the next president and the next Congress will have a hard time changing or canceling any Iran deal -- -- which is reportedly near done -- especially if it is working reasonably well.
Well, this is new, even in the world of the GOP batshit-crazy. This really does one-up it all. It's also kind of funny that there is a constitutional error in what the Senators wrote to the government of Iran. The Senate does NOT ratify treaties. That is even indicated directly on their Senate website. Instead, the Senate takes up a resolution of ratification, by which the Senate formally gives its advice and consent, empowering the president to proceed with ratification” . It's a fine point, almost splitting hairs, but worth noting.
So, Republicans hate this Democratic President so much that they are even willing to pen a letter to someone they consider an enemy of ours.
Back to the Bloomberg link:
It's stunning. And it's a rebuke on an international stage that doesn't really have a precedent. Imagine Democrats micro-managing the START talks in the 80s by sending an open letter to Gorbachev? It just wouldn't have been viewed as an acceptable political move while the talks were still happening.
The only conclusion we can make is that the GOP is not the loyal opposition, it is a severly disloyal opposition and deserves to be treated with disdain and contempt for such unamerican behavior. The GOP simply hates America, it's that simple.
And that is different from what we are doing to Iran right now, how?
Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won t Last - Bloomberg View
A group of 47 Republican senators has written an open letter to Iran's leaders warning them that any nuclear deal they sign with President Barack Obama's administration won’t last after Obama leaves office.Organized by freshman Senator Tom Cotton and signed by the chamber's entire party leadership as well as potential 2016 presidential contenders Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, the letter is meant not just to discourage the Iranian regime from signing a deal but also to pressure the White House into giving Congress some authority over the process.
“It has come to our attention while observing your nuclear negotiations with our government that you may not fully understand our constitutional system … Anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement,” the senators wrote. “The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.”
Arms-control advocates and supporters of the negotiations argue that the next president and the next Congress will have a hard time changing or canceling any Iran deal -- -- which is reportedly near done -- especially if it is working reasonably well.
Well, this is new, even in the world of the GOP batshit-crazy. This really does one-up it all. It's also kind of funny that there is a constitutional error in what the Senators wrote to the government of Iran. The Senate does NOT ratify treaties. That is even indicated directly on their Senate website. Instead, the Senate takes up a resolution of ratification, by which the Senate formally gives its advice and consent, empowering the president to proceed with ratification” . It's a fine point, almost splitting hairs, but worth noting.
So, Republicans hate this Democratic President so much that they are even willing to pen a letter to someone they consider an enemy of ours.
Back to the Bloomberg link:
It's stunning. And it's a rebuke on an international stage that doesn't really have a precedent. Imagine Democrats micro-managing the START talks in the 80s by sending an open letter to Gorbachev? It just wouldn't have been viewed as an acceptable political move while the talks were still happening.
The only conclusion we can make is that the GOP is not the loyal opposition, it is a severly disloyal opposition and deserves to be treated with disdain and contempt for such unamerican behavior. The GOP simply hates America, it's that simple.
Are you mad because the GOP has balls and don't cower to this shit house crazy administration? Does it really hurt your poor little feelings?
Republicans Warn Iran -- and Obama -- That Deal Won t Last - Bloomberg View
A group of 47 Republican senators has written an open letter to Iran's leaders warning them that any nuclear deal they sign with President Barack Obama's administration won’t last after Obama leaves office.Organized by freshman Senator Tom Cotton and signed by the chamber's entire party leadership as well as potential 2016 presidential contenders Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, the letter is meant not just to discourage the Iranian regime from signing a deal but also to pressure the White House into giving Congress some authority over the process.
“It has come to our attention while observing your nuclear negotiations with our government that you may not fully understand our constitutional system … Anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement,” the senators wrote. “The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.”
Arms-control advocates and supporters of the negotiations argue that the next president and the next Congress will have a hard time changing or canceling any Iran deal -- -- which is reportedly near done -- especially if it is working reasonably well.
Well, this is new, even in the world of the GOP batshit-crazy. This really does one-up it all. It's also kind of funny that there is a constitutional error in what the Senators wrote to the government of Iran. The Senate does NOT ratify treaties. That is even indicated directly on their Senate website. Instead, the Senate takes up a resolution of ratification, by which the Senate formally gives its advice and consent, empowering the president to proceed with ratification” . It's a fine point, almost splitting hairs, but worth noting.
So, Republicans hate this Democratic President so much that they are even willing to pen a letter to someone they consider an enemy of ours.
Back to the Bloomberg link:
It's stunning. And it's a rebuke on an international stage that doesn't really have a precedent. Imagine Democrats micro-managing the START talks in the 80s by sending an open letter to Gorbachev? It just wouldn't have been viewed as an acceptable political move while the talks were still happening.
The only conclusion we can make is that the GOP is not the loyal opposition, it is a severly disloyal opposition and deserves to be treated with disdain and contempt for such unamerican behavior. The GOP simply hates America, it's that simple.
Are you mad because the GOP has balls and don't cower to this shit house crazy administration? Does it really hurt your poor little feelings?
What makes you believe that negotiating with Iran is an example of Obama expecting the Republicans to cower to him?
Why do I not want the Republicans to start another war?
Why do I not want the Republicans to start another war?
Why didn't you get mad when Democrats started three of them? Where's your outrage when we invade the airspace of other nations to drone the shit out of someone? Where are you while we bomb ISIS into smithereens?
Big newsflash pal, we're already at war. The moment that first bomb hits home, that's war.
Be specific explain how the letter violates the requirements established by the Constitution for treason. Shall I quote that requirement or in your ignorance can you find it on your own?The OP is correct that no one will be prosecuted under the Logan Act however. given what those GOP Senators actually did, the failure to prosecute them doesn't make it any less of an act of sedition against the USA.
So you're not upset that Obama is making the unprecedented claim that he somehow has the right to make a nuclear arms deal without the Senate's consent, and, even worse, that he wants to make such a deal with the fanatical, terrorist-backing, Holocaust-denying murderous regime in Iran.
Where were you when Bush started the drone attacks?
Wars are declared against sovereign states, dude. ISIS is not a sovereign state.
Where were you when Bush started the drone attacks?
In high school, focusing on my studies, not the sordid state of American politics.
Wars are declared against sovereign states, dude. ISIS is not a sovereign state.
templarguy said:Actually the definition didn't matter to you when Bush declared his "war on terror." It was an "unnecessary war" according to you. You talk a big game, but can't back it up.
They've probably got some deep stock investments in the military industrial complex.I think those 47 senators are hoping for that.Fortunately Congress can't force a war..."Did the letter to the Iranian leadership say "we will eliminate the agreement and then start a war with you"?
Seems the only ones on this thread talking about war are those on the left claiming that the right wants war.
And then there is the fool that YOU are bulldog who claimed the right prefers to going to war over supporting a blacks presidents initiatives.
Which means you fell into using 2 unsubstantiated talking points in one post.
When one spins or uses unsubstantiated talking points, one proves to the rest that he or she feels very weak in his/her position.
I'm quite confident in my points. The letter was an obvious effort to prevent the signing of any treaty. We either get them to agree to not building a bomb, or we have to go to war. Those are the only two options. Why are you supporting the traitorous actions of crazy republicans?
If they hijack the chances of a good treaty, the only alternative will be war.
That is correct. I didn't support Bush's war. ISIS is a direct result of it.
Wow, so you are but a kid.
Wow, so you are but a kid.
I'm 27 smartass.
So you're not upset that Obama is making the unprecedented claim that he somehow has the right to make a nuclear arms deal without the Senate's consent, and, even worse, that he wants to make such a deal with the fanatical, terrorist-backing, Holocaust-denying murderous regime in Iran.
No, you're not upset with that. You're upset that in response to Obama's unprecedented usurpation, 47 Senate Republicans would dare to write an open letter to Iran's mullahs to warn them that any deal that Obama might be dumb enough to make with them would only be temporary and could end with the next president.
Find me an example of a president who presumed to have the power to make a nuke deal with a hostile nation without the Senate's consent. The Democrats who are claiming that other presidents have made deals with foreign leaders without the Senate's consent must be hoping that most Americans don't know any history. The supposed "precedents" that the Democrats have cited don't even come close to the magnitude of a nuke deal with Iran.
Wow, so you are but a kid.
I'm 27 smartass.
As I said. You are a kid.
That is correct. I didn't support Bush's war. ISIS is a direct result of it.
Obama's removal of the troops was in fact the cause of it. So, you don't seem to mind when Obama does this kind of stuff, why is that?
Will all the staunch defenders of Presidential authority please post links to their criticisms of Pelosi in 2007?
Pelosi Meets With Syrian Leader
Hussein Malla/Associated Press
Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, meeting today at the Presidential Palace in Damascus with President Bashar al-Assad of Syria.
By HASSAN M. FATTAH and GRAHAM BOWLEY
Published: April 4, 2007
DAMASCUS, Syria, April 4 —Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, met here today with President Bashar al-Assad of Syria and discussed a variety of Middle Eastern issues, including the situations in Iraq and Lebanon and the prospect of peace talks between Syria and Israel.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/04/world/middleeast/04cnd-pelosi.html?_r=0
You mean the same leadership republicans like Frank Wolf and Darrell Issa who visited with the Syrian President around the same time as Pelosi?
Did they support or oppose the President?
